3 ms·

I'm all for historical trivia, when it comes sourced - or at least from a source reputable in historical matters. This piece is neither.

• keepamovin 3y ago
  Yes, but are you providing any sources for any claims contrary to those made here?
  • nickthegreek 3y ago
    They are under no obligation to. The person writing the piece is the one who should be providing footnotes to their new claims.
    • keepamovin 3y ago
      Sure they are. This seems just a restatement of facts about US history. if you’re going to counter that you have to provide sources. Otherwise it’s not credible. If it’s so obviously wrong, why not just source to where it’s wrong? the repetition of dislike, or whatever at the article without sources is suspicious and ideological. Why would your support that?